barbie blank

images Barbie Blank. Finishing Move:

Barbie-Blank-0108.jpg

franklin

02-12 06:04 PM

But quality of life is determined by the freedom and once you get your GC then you will be able to do anything, right ? or I am thinking wrong.

Maybe yes - Quality of Life is highly subjective and personal. For example, I value very highly how I am treated at my current employer. I love the work, the people, and my environment. I have some potentially VERY exciting projects coming up in the next few years that could do wonders for my resume. I've been at the same company for 5 years and have built up some serious company loyalty :)

Also, are you talking about the risk involved in changing jobs because of H1B transfer process. Because I am a contractor and all consulting companies are MORE or LESS the same. They all try to make money out of you. So I am trying to understand what kind of risk is that.

Your thoghts are important. Please let me know.

Thanks

For me, the risk involved in changing a job just so I can jump into an EB2 category is too great. By risk, I mean losing the work environment, colleagues, potential experience - THAT is the quality of life I would be giving up. Of course, your job sounds entirely different, being a consulting basis. So I can totally appreciate how you may prioritize differently - meaning finalizing your green card status as soon as you can.

If I was in your shoes, yes - I would probably do exactly what you are thinking of.

Like I said though, its a personal choice

---

wallpaper Barbie-Blank-0108.jpg

BARBIE BLANK (aka KELLY KELLY)

akhilmahajan

04-23 09:30 AM

I have not got my i140 approval yet........

but the Receipt i got for my i140 says:-

Notice Type: Approval Notice
Section: Mern of Profession w/Adv Deg,or
of Excentn'l Abllitv
Sec .203.(b) (2)

So, does that mean it is being processed for EB2.

thanks.

---

Barbie Blank

pd_recapturing

05-23 01:45 PM

Please go through this (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5192)and reanalyze if you really want to go to H1 from EAD ....

---

2011 BARBIE BLANK (aka KELLY KELLY)

Barbie Blank

liche

04-20 06:23 PM

USCIS said you should receive receipt dated no later than June 2
you can check their official press release (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=183f301458e49110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD).

---

more...

Barbie Blank

styrum

10-30 03:20 PM

I tried to post a couple of times and they are not getting posted. Does the comments need to be reviewed by some one before they get posted? Is it instantaneous?
They are not instantaneous. Mine showed up in an hour for sure.

---

Barbie Blank - Kelly Kelly

bang

01-05 07:09 AM

Otherway is, as the person status is in pending which is not illegal ----- Where did you find this from ????

---

more...

by Barbie--Blank

h1vegas

07-30 12:25 PM

Dont worry it will be fine
Even me and my spouse applied together in late june
I got mine last week and her's is still pending.
Its USCIS...relax

---

2010 Barbie Blank

Barbie Blank. Finishing Move:

kartikiran

04-08 03:29 PM

PD: MARCH -2002 (EB3 India)
I-485 filed: 29-JUN-2007 (NSC)
I-485 RD: 13-AUGUST-2007

---

more...

Barbie Blank signe un

gc_peshwa

05-13 05:11 PM

I am new here.Thanks I updated it .

This is interesting news indeed. If you are real, (which I think you did confirm :D ) that means another interesting piece of evidence that Eb2 cutoff dates are going to move further into 2007 very soon.

Trinity
Dont worry. I think you should consult with another lawyer to assess whether you will waste that money.

---

hair Barbie Blank

Barbie blank shaking hands

rsdang

11-20 10:53 AM

http://cli.gs/De4Z4u

BTW, what's scary about this memo..

Infact, I find it encouraging, that TSC is trying to facilitate the process one way or other, given their system deficiency.

Are we missing something?

I wish Nebraska did this too and for all forms not just I-140...

---

more...

-aka-arbie-lank-9.jpg

Green.Tech

08-18 02:51 PM

If you google, there are so many other cheaper providers as well (but their quality may be cheaper as well). For example, check this: WatchIndia - Indian TV online with live Indian TV Channels (http://www.watchindia.tv/). Anyone has any experience using watchindia?

---

hot Barbie Blank

Barbie Blank

pappu

04-08 12:03 PM

Please add your details in IV tracker

http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_tracker&Itemid=63

and we can see the total cases in EB3

---

more...

house arbie blank fired

Barbie Blank

ItIsNotFunny

12-17 03:27 PM

I had posted my query on another thread but thought of creating a new one with all the updates.

My priority date is Feb 26, 2008 and I-140 mid 2008.
It was applied under EB2 category (Masters Degree). Currently, I'm on the 5th yr of my H1. My 6th year starts in Feb 2009.

Had received an RFE to which we responded but it still got denied On Dec 3, 2008. I didn't read the RFE but the lawyer said they have requested for Audited Financial statements of 2007 which my company does not have. The main reason for the denial was that the company has a loss and we did not provide Audited statements for 2007. I wasn�t being paid per the prevailing rate in 2007. So I couldn�t provide W-2 for 2007.

My lawyer suggested that we appeal the denial and start a new PERM in EB3 category through the same company.

She also suggested that in the appeal we show that I am being paid per the prevailing in 2008 since my priority date is in 2008. I have to respond to the Denial by Dec 30th but I will not have my W-2 by then. Am not in a position to provide pay stubs since the difference in pay is an adjustment in Dec.

My question to you all are:

1. Are these my only option to make sure I can renew my H1 after the 6th
year?
2. How long does an appeal take to respond?
3. Is appeal my only way out? Can I request for a
Motion to Re-open/Reconsider by Dec 30th and submit the W-2 in
Jan 2009?
4. If I show the prevailing wage of EB2 and I am filing another PERM in EB3,
will that be a problem?
5. At what stage of the green card process should I be in to be eligible for
my H1 to be extended after my 6th year?
6. Any other issues that might come up?


Thanks!

I would suggest you appeal somewhere in Jan and meanwhile file for extension. Please talk to lawyer though.

---

tattoo Barbie Blank - Kelly Kelly

arbie-lank.net

sb724

08-15 05:34 PM

Hi,

I got RFE as PAchai_Attai, the difference is he got NOID.
My attorney has submitted evidences a week ago, still now no updates on my 485.
I have not got tracking # from attorney, he sent email that he submitted evidences. He said he can not check which is my track # used to my case in his office.
He said I have to wait long time to see updates on my case, becuase USCIS is receiving applications in flood.
These Evidences supposed to received by USCIS before Aug 13th. My case is at NSC.
I am in confusion that how to deal this.

Please advise.

Thanks
sk

---

more...

pictures by Barbie--Blank

Barbie Blank - Kelly Kelly

add78

05-30 09:54 AM

1. If you are still with university and the H1 is valid, you are not out of status.
2. If you are out of university and if company A's H1 is valid, you can start work with company A.

If you are out of university and company A's H1 is valid, but you are not getting job or salary - you are out of status

If you are out of university and company A's H1 is not valid, you are out of stats.

Please check with attorney asap.
What Snathan said above is absolutely 100% correct.
However as someone else said about stamping and getting over the out of status period issues is not correct, if at any point you were out of status (no salary or no valid i-94 (white card or the 797)), it may come back to haunt you during GC process.
Without getting into the risk/debate of whether you were counted for cap when "A" filed for your H1, in order to file with another employer "C", it is advisable to work for "A" if they have a valid H1 filed for you and if you have just left the University employer without any delay and consult with an attorney to remedy the out of status issue for the period since you left the Univ. employer. And as always, if you think you were helped by the senior members here, please consider helping IV by donating to your own cause as soon as you get a project / back on track. Thank You.

---

dresses Barbie Blank

Leather Bound by Barbie Blank

dpsg

03-24 02:51 PM

Folks,
Can someone verify these numbers are correct. If It is skewed
I will call Ms Rosemary to correct them.

http://www.numbersusa.com/PDFs/Sense...Comparison.pdf
http://www.numbersusa.com/PDFs/Sense...umbersComp.pdf

Thanks,

---

more...

makeup Barbie Blank signe un

arbie blank fired

srisra

07-13 09:25 PM

my lawyer says... apply now.. dont know what will be situ in october.. it might go forward.. backward...my pd is 10/2003.

he says since my medicals are over.. all docs are ready ... so he says file and be part of lawsuit..
is this wise idea...if i say yes.. he will file by next week..
i already sent money for my wife...
my company is not covering my wife's expenses.
the lawyer is charing 600 for legal and 745 for filing...
are these
reasonable fees

---

girlfriend arbie-lank.net

Barbie Blank, arbie,

go_guy123

08-24 04:52 PM

ILW.COM - immigration news: Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. <em>USCIS</em> Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability (http://www.ilw.com/articles/2009,0825-mehta.shtm)

Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta

As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).

Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.

Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.

A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.

In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.

At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�

The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8

Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.

Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10

�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�

Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:

1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�

It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.

---

hairstyles -aka-arbie-lank-9.jpg

Barbie Blank

trueguy

08-04 06:12 PM

Nopes. No refund.

After a month or so when they pick your EAD/AP applications, they will send you a denial notice for EAD/AP bcoz you don't have a pending I-485 at that time.

---

gc_peshwa

10-11 02:13 AM

Thanx Rajeev!
Pappu
Does IV have a stand on this one?

---

dealsnet

08-19 12:53 PM

I did reply same questions from many people before.
Give me green.

See the linkhttp://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=271903#post271903

About ADIT:
ADIT=Alien Documentation Identification & Telecommunication Systems.
Could mean biometrics not up to date or just stamp in passport.
Either way they will tell you what they want.

ADIT (I-551) stamping

�
Applicant appears at local USCIS for ADIT processing, as outlined in AOS approval letter. Applicant will not be scheduled for an ADIT appointment, ADIT processing is done by "walk-in" basis ONLY.

�
Once the applicant adjusts his/her status by completing ADIT processing, s/he is given the I-551 permanent resident stamp in his/her passport.

---